It's also possible that "Nova Squadron" is just one of many (as Value Subtracted mentions herein) and that there are many other Nova Squadrons without any issues in the intermittent years between the incidents. It's possible that, like most things in the Star Trek universe, we only see the times when something interesting/dramatic occurs, not the boring day-to-day.

Said another way, just because you periodically have a rowdy graduating class from primary/secondary education, doesn't mean you stop having graduating students.

I would think that any object (including the ship) is traveling at a sub-light speed within the warp bubble and therefore would only keep that same velocity when (catastrophically) exiting the warp bubble. Unless by exiting the warp bubble in an uncontrolled manner creates some other force which slows the object somehow.

My understanding is that the warp bubble is moving space around the object (including the ship) rather than accelerating the object to FTL (faster-than-light) speeds, thus we really only have to consider the relative velocities within the warp bubble.

Edit to add: Oh, also, I should add that (IMO) the object cannot continue to travel at FTL speed since it has no warp drive of its own to maintain the warp field.

How about we carve a Spock or Picard or Mariner or really anyone else who isn't a genocidal dictator? Hmm? Maybe?

No? Perhaps my dream for Star Trek has too much hope for humanity's future? Not enough grit, tears, and flashy booms?

Agreed. I would have loved to have that kind of callback to the story.

Groundhog Day

Source, please?

Hear, hear!!

I realize I'm not adding much value by saying this, but... I still wanted to support this with a comment and not just an upvote.

This is beautiful! I love data and I'm delighted you were inspired by my post to gather the data.

Thank you for doing this!

I like that too. I'm not sure it would counter these "rules".

How would you propose phrasing a rule for that non-Fed criteria?

To be fair, I think every series has a lot of episodes that would fail this test, some of which were excellent, like DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”, and “Far Beyond the Stars” or TNG’s “The Inner Light”, but if used to assess a series, I think this could be a good metric.

Indeed, "In the Pale Moonlight" is one I thought of which fails as well. I still think it makes a good measure to see how many episodes of a show pass/fail overall. Only to see if it's really about the whole crew or mostly one character. (Arguably, early TNG comes really close to being Star Trek: Wesley while mid/late TNG comes close to Star Trek: Data.)

I don't think you need to watch Discovery to enjoy Strange New Worlds. There might be a few things established in the lore/backstory from Discovery, but any "confusion" from those references will quickly dissipate. SNW makes it easy to see it as a distinct show in a new/expanded telling of a known crew/time.

I will add that there will be stylistic choices in the production that will take a little getting used to, but remember that just about every Star Trek show has done this. Enjoy the story!

Happy First Contact Day, Fediverse! =/=

This post is my first contact with startrek.website! Happy to be here. LLAP